2015 Commercial Handicapping Program

[Jingle]

I was just wondering if there are any Massa's MPH or Bris's Multicap Software users in the "other" category above. Both these products have been around for a while as you know. "Other" has just over 20% of users.

[completebill]

Ken Massa has moved on, and is now the creator/ purveyor of the HTR program, which is what I use (profitably) and heartily recommend. For what it's worth, it's been (and is being) used by the overwhelming # of successful Tournament Players.

The Program is free--you just have to for the HDW data. There's a free demo on the website. Your (free) purchase gives you perpetual upates and improvements, and Ken is constantly researching and coming up with some remarkable developments.

Yes, HTR does include very sophisticated pace-analysis features, but there is SO much more.

My advice--forget MPH!

[Jingle]

Thanks for the reply Bill. As you can see by the poll above there is more than one way to skin the cat. MPH and HTR (much improved over MPH) are just a couple of them. I agree HTR is probably in a class by itself but don't short change JCapper.

Congrats on your great day Sat. at HourseTourneys. Great Cappin' Bill. Those bombs help.

[completebill]

Thanks, Jingle---I am in no way Shorting the JCapper Software. I know it's a superior product, and that it has great customer support. It's an individual preference. After I'd tried Dozens (yes, literally), of the inferior products, I looked very closely at HSH, HTR, and JCapper. I rejected HTR because Dave, while a great guy, is just too scattered, and I also share a belief that I've seen expressed by others, that he holds back the best stuff for "private" clients, presumably paying big $$. (What ever happened to his ant hills??).
Jeff seemed like a great guy, and I liked the demo, But Ken Massa also impressed me in our initial conversation, and I liked both his demo and his website.
The final decider was the price HTR is FREE, with updates and support forever. I'm very happy with my choice. HOWEVER, had I decided to go with JCapper, I'm sure I'd be satisfied also.

[UltimateBetter]

Great software.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by completebill

I rejected HTR because Dave, while a great guy, is just too scattered, and I also share a belief that I've seen expressed by others, that he holds back the best stuff for "private" clients, presumably paying big $$. (What ever happened to his ant hills??).

You've posted this multiple times, as an aside, but it's coming across as something else entirely different.

I'm sure Dave does contract work for people willing to pay him. But that doesn't mean he can include any of that work in HSH, even if it is deemed "superior."

If someone pays Dave $$$ to code a proprietary method, why in the world would you think his contract with the person paying him would allow him to put that in a publicly available piece of software (HSH)?

It's akin to buying a PC from Hewlett Packard and expecting to get the same level of coding and performance that they do for the Defense Department....

[Tom]

I rejected HTR....

Have you told Ken yet?

[Pensacola Pete]

At one point or another I've tried HTR, HSH, JCapper, RDSS, Synergism 6, Quickhorse, and Netcapper. They all have their good points, and they all have some shortcomings. In the end, I use my own homegrown software that cranks out a few plays a week and makes a modest profit. I've never given up my day job, though. Anybody who can make a decent living betting thoroughbreds today is accomplishing something I can't do.

[cbp]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

I'm sure Dave does contract work for people willing to pay him. But that doesn't mean he can include any of that work in HSH, even if it is deemed "superior."

If someone pays Dave $$$ to code a proprietary method, why in the world would you think his contract with the person paying him would allow him to put that in a publicly available piece of software (HSH)?

Clearly, there's no debating the above. But would anything stand in the way of Dave using this code for himself? I seem to recall Dave writing that he wasn't profitable until a few years ago; and as a result of help from a (few) client(s). I then wonder if this was a result of some proprietary software enhancement. If so, and the 'public' program wasn't profitable, might there then be an issue?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by cbp

Clearly, there's no debating the above. But would anything stand in the way of Dave using this code for himself? I seem to recall Dave writing that he wasn't profitable until a few years ago; and as a result of help from a (few) client(s). I then wonder if this was a result of some proprietary software enhancement. If so, and the 'public' program wasn't profitable, might there then be an issue?

Is there such a thing as a "profitable program" being sold out there...or is it the HORSEPLAYER who ultimately decides whether the operation will be "successful" or not? Can a losing player transform himself into a "winner" by using the "right" program...or are these programs best left in the hands of those who are already winning, and are looking to further pad their bottom lines?

[cbp]

Interesting question. I think all of these programs offer platforms for data analysis. Success would depend on the level, of the program and user, and the usability. I seem to recall that Massa is constantly updating angles/insights, thus giving a leg up to all his users. But I'm not referring to black boxes here, so anyone with racing knowledge could do the same, if not better, with Python.

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Is there such a thing as a "profitable program" being sold out there...or is it the HORSEPLAYER who ultimately decides whether the operation will be "successful" or not? Can a losing player transform himself into a "winner" by using the "right" program...or are these programs best left in the hands of those who are already winning, and are looking to further pad their bottom lines?

I do not think that there exists such a thing like a "profitable program" if by this term you are referring to a black box spawning betting selections. Still, I am sure that the computer can definitely be used to implement several useful models that would have been impossible to evaluate by hand. These models include things like speed and pace figures, primitive handicapping factors, connection statistics etc.

I am not sure that a program can convert a looser to winner but I have no doubt that it can definitely improve his understanding of the game. Since I know you are a good poker player, you can think as an analogy the advantage a player has by using a hand range simulation when analyzing a specific hand or as another example you can think of the use of computers in the games of chess and backgammon...

[raybo]

I've said this before, many times, software can be the best on the planet but some of it's users will still not be profitable. The old saying: "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink" is appropriate. Even a black box program that has proven profitable, for some, could be a loser for others if the user doesn't follow the rules of the program, and/or it's wagering methodology, and/or perform the necessary maintenance/testing work, etc. that underlies the program.

I have little doubt that Dave either is now, or could be profitable if he devoted himself to playing, which I don't believe he does anymore. It becomes hard work and/or very boring for many, especially when the program/method requires betting multiple tracks and races every day. Many software creators get more satisfaction, and have more fun, from the creation/evolution process than from actual betting. That last sentence applies to me, for sure. I really dislike the act of gambling, and if it weren't for the profit I would not be doing it, that's for sure. I only play 2 or 3 days per week, at most, but I work in my program hours per day, every day.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by raybo

I've said this before, many times, software can be the best on the planet but some of it's users will still not be profitable. The old saying: "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink" is appropriate. Even a black box program that has proven profitable, for some, could be a loser for others if the user doesn't follow the rules of the program, and/or it's wagering methodology, and/or perform the necessary maintenance/testing work, etc. that underlies the program.

I have little doubt that Dave either is now, or could be profitable if he devoted himself to playing, which I don't believe he does anymore. It becomes hard work and/or very boring for many, especially when the program/method requires betting multiple tracks and races every day. Many software creators get more satisfaction, and have more fun, from the creation/evolution process than from actual betting. That last sentence applies to me, for sure. I really dislike the act of gambling, and if it weren't for the profit I would not be doing it, that's for sure. I only play 2 or 3 days per week, at most, but I work in my program hours per day, every day.

Dave says that it takes him 45 seconds to handicap a race...and that he can handicap and bet 40 consecutive races, as they occur. Is that what you call "hard work" in handicapping races?

[raybo]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Dave says that it takes him 45 seconds to handicap a race...and that he can handicap and bet 40 consecutive races, as they occur. Is that what you call "hard work" in handicapping races?

Betting that many races in that time period would indeed be hard work, for me anyway. And, I believe Dave said something similar not too long ago, on this forum. The betting part is what becomes hard work when you're betting that many races, back to back, trying to follow each race, look at odds, formulate bets, and place those bets, although I believe Dave's program does some of that work for him. Still, it's a tough grind sitting there race after race, for hours, every day. And, yes, it gets very boring, and very old, for me, very quickly. And my program handicaps a race in a couple of seconds, almost instantaneously when I click a race button. Still boring.